If you haven’t seen or read The Crucible, I’ll warn you now that it isn’t a particularly happy play. Without spoiling too much, the narrative focuses on the 1692 Salem witch trials and the paranoia, hysteria and greed that both motivated the events and featured prominently within them. Bleaker still, it’s impossible to treat this play purely as a somewhat grim historical drama, since Miller wrote The Crucible as an allegory of the 1950s McCarthy witch hunts. This leaves the audience with a rather sobering thought: is institutionalized hysteria merely part of a continuing pattern of human misconduct? If so, is it something we can ever hope to overcome? I’ll refrain from too much political commentary, though I genuinely feel that The Crucible is one of those plays that you should watch simply because you have to. True, it’s frequently tense and emotionally raw, but it’s worth it alone for the commentary it provides on institutionalized paranoia and the subjectification of truth.

I was thoroughly impressed with the Blewbury Players’ production of The Crucible. Before I critique the production, however, special praise should be given to the location, since an hour before the play started all members of the audience were invited to an open clearing where they could spread out a rug and enjoy any food they’d brought with them. Admittedly, I’ve never been all that into picnic culture, but it certainly created a relaxed and rather pleasant atmosphere that’s hard not to appreciate. The stage itself is open air, and whilst this setting doesn’t provide the acoustics of an indoor theatre (this was only a minor problem in the first half when there were a few lines I struggled to hear, and I had no issues in the second half), the absence of a traditional stage arrangement allowed for a creative and versatile design. One particularly impressive background feature was a large cross that at one point in the narrative, folded back and transformed into gallows. Not only was the symbolism striking, it also emphasised the tonal change of the narrative.

The acting was another admirable aspect of the production, with the cast delivering strong performances across the board. I particularly enjoyed by Alex Watts’ portrayal of John Proctor, an everyman motivated by moral conviction and a genuine desire for honesty, who nonetheless has feet of clay. However, I felt that slightly more could have been made of certain comedic lines in the first half of the play. Whilst the audience delivered the odd polite chuckle, certain lines felt like they should have elicited a greater response. Nonetheless, the court proceedings in the second half felt suitably intimidating and emotionally intense, ensuring that the two halves effectively tonally contrasted with each other. This was also helped by the striking use of lighting, as well as the subtle, though clearly ominous, music that appeared during certain scenes.

This is an excellent play that’s supported by strong acting and an imaginative and profoundly striking production. If you have the opportunity to see it, I highly recommend that you do, though you should definitely check the weather conditions beforehand. You might also consider bringing food, drink and a picnic rug.